all american 4 sezon 15 bolum izle diziler moon knight

At the same time, cinematography can by no means be called a "technical" art. Man's primordial need for a figurative understanding of reality gave birth to this mass form of art. Cinema is synthetic in nature, it combines elements of literature, theater, painting, music, choreography. That is why cinematography operates with many expressive possibilities borrowed from other forms of art. At the same time, cinema has its own specific means and techniques, in particular: perspective (angle of view of the film camera), change of plans (general, medium and large), montage, which combines individual frames in a logical sequence and makes it possible to convey the emotional and psychological tension of the episode.

Chaplin began his career in cinema at the Keystone Film studio. It was headed by the patriarch of American comedy M. Sennett, whose school also went through the famous comedians B. Keaton and G. Lloyd. However, the real "godfather" of American cinema of the beginning of the 20th century. certainly was D. W. Griffith (1875–1948). His films, among which the Birth of a Nation and Intolerance should be especially noted, enriched not only US cinema, but also the entire world cinema with new means of expression, improvement of the specifics of montage (parallel montage). Extremely interesting experiments are taking place at the same time and on the other side of the ocean - in the countries of Eastern Europe, in particular in Russia, where directors Ya. Protazanov, V. Gardin, E. Bauer, whose work was connected with the flourishing of the melodrama genre, are actively working.

The cinema of independent Ukraine becomes the object of research by I. Zubavina. It must be said that the author set himself a difficult task: the material, one might say, is still pulsating, having "not stood up" in numerous studies. But the author decently overcomes these difficulties, singling out the most noticeable and expressive tendencies manifested in film productions created at domestic studios. I. Zubavina observes how the breath of time changes the aesthetics of national cinema, how painfully these changes sometimes occur, but the author does not doubt their regularity and necessity.